LIBRARY OF 



CONGRESS 




016 085 214 8 
REPORT OF THE KAXSAS CO^TPERENCE COMMITTEE. 



SPEECH 

OF 



HON. JACOB COLLAMEll, OF VERMONT. 



2.:)t 







f^i'^ 



Delivered in the Senate of the United States, April 27, 1858. 



The Senate having under consideration the 
report of the committee of conference on the 
disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the bill 
for the admission of the State of Kansas inio the 
Union — 

Mr. COLLAMER said : 

Mr. PuKsiDENT : I do not propose, at this time, 
to occupy the Senate at any great length ; hut I 
shall endeavor, as succinctly and as distinctly as 
I can, state, in the first ])lace, why I, together 
with those who act with me, opposed the Senate 
bill, without g ing into the argument on its mer- 
its ; and, in the second pl.ace, why we voted for 
the amendment of the House of Representatives ; 
and, in the third place, why we cannot vote for 
the proposition now offered. 

First, as to the Senate bill : its substance was, 
if adopted, that it admitted Kansas into the Union 
aa a State under the Lecorapton Constitution, 
without any further action of the people. Our 
objections consisted essentially in these: that 
that Constitution was framed by a Convention 
■which was the fruit and result of usurpation and 
fraud ; that the usurpation which had been insti- 
tuted originally, continued so as to deprive the 
people of the opportunity of free voting on the 
subject of calling a Convention ; that an unfair 
and imperfect census was taken, by which a 
large part of the people were deprived of the 
chance of voting for delegates; that the Consti- 
tution was formed in defiance of the will of the 
people^as manifested in their then recent elec- 
tion for a Territorial Legislature, and was made, 
in point of fact, only by those who acted in and 
approved of it, by a minority of those originally 
elected to the Convention; that the Constitution 
was professed to be presented to the people in a 
disguised and deceptive form ; that the people 
themselves were deprived of the opportunity 
which had been promised to them, of passing 
upon the whole CoDStitution ; that ao election 



was held, wherein they professed to obtain some 
six thousand votes for the Constitution with Sla- 
very ; that an election for State officers was 
made under that Constitution by officers not in 
any way appointed by the people, and unknown 
to the law; that that election was fraudulently 
conducted; and that, besides all this, the peo- 
[)le, at an election held on the 4th of January, by 
virtue of an act of the Territorial Legislature, by 
a very large majority, repudiated it. These, pnt 
together and aggregated, constituted our ol jee- 
tion to the Lecompton Constitution ; and for 
these reasons we considered that it ought not to 
receive the attention of Congress ; that the State 
should not be admitted under it; and that it was 
not entitled to be regarded in any measure as a 
Constitution presenting the views of the people 
of Kansas. 

In all these respects the Senate, by a large 
majority, voted us down. Our objection was not 
merely that the Constitution had not been sub- 
mitted to the people. We insisted that, in point 
of fact, the people had, on the 4th of January, 
under lawful authority, voted directly to reject 
it by a very large majority. That, to be sure, 
among others, was ground of complaint ; but all 
these objections, and others which were present-' 
ed by other gentlemen, were aggregated in the 
complaint. The Senate, however, decided that, 
in point of fact, the Lecompton Constitution was 
the Constitution of Kansas, so far as the action 
of Kansas wfts concerned ; and that it was only 
for Congress to say whether they would accept 
it; that the people had made that Constitution 
legally by their delegates — not only formed it, 
but adopted it, and that the only question of 
difference existing there was one in relation to 
Slavery, which, as they said, was fairly submit* 
tpd. They therefore passed a bill admitting Kan- 
sas as a State with that Constitution. 

I next call attention to the amendment pre- 






sented by the House of Representatives. What 
was its character? Why was it voted for? So 
far as 1 could understand it, the substance of 
it, without recurring to paniculars, insisted on 
three things : first, that the Lecompton Consti- 
tution should be submitted to a vote of the peo- 
ple, and if they adopted it, very well — it was to 
stand ; but, second, if they did not adopt it, they 
should proceed, by a Convention, to form such a 
Constitution as they wished ; and that, upon be- 
ii)!.'- ratified by the people, they should be ad- 
ni'iiDed as a State with such new Constitution ; 
aiid, third, in order to secure fair elections on 
the Constitution, a board was formed, consisting 
of the Governor and Secretary of the Territory, 
appointed by the President, and of the presiding 
officers of the two Houses of the Territorial Leg- 
islature, elected by the people ; and this board 
was to direct and control the elections and their 
returns, pass upon them, and finally decide them. 
That was the proposition which came to us as 
an amendment from the House of Represent- 
atives. Why did we vote for it? In the first 
place, it would be suflScient for me to say that 
here were presented to us two alternatives — on 
the one hand, the Lecompton Constitution, which 
had been rejected by the people of Kansas, most 
imperatively and conclusively, aud, on the other, 
an offer to submit it to the people, accompanied 
by a provision, that if they did not like it they 
might make another Constitution which they 
did like. Could there be any hesitation as to 
how we should vote in regard to these two al- 
ternatives ? Could there be any doubt as to the 
choice we should make between them ? 

In the next place, if we voted against the 
House amendment, we deprived the people of 
Kansas even of the right of establishing a free 
Constitution ; we left tbem to have the Lecomp- 
ton Constitution imposed upon them, and gave 
them no opportunity to form a free one. Hence 
we voted for that proposition. Again, it was 
fair — it was fair even to those who claim that 
the people, iu forming their Constitution, may 
make it a free-State or a slave-State Constitu- 
tion, as they please, because it offered that op- 
portunity. That proposition wa^s a very liberal 
step for those gentlemen to take — and there are 
some such in the country — who bald that the 
people, in the formation of a State Constitution 
even, have not the right to enslav'e their fellow- 
men. But those gentlemen, if any such there 
were in the two Houses, voted for it with great 
liberality. And why ? First, because it was the 
best of the two alternatives offered to them. 
Next, because, after the knowledge of the vote 
of the 4th of January, disclosing ten thousand 
majority against this Constitution, there was 
every moral certainty that when the Lecompton 
Constitution, with Slavery, was presented to the 
people of Kansas, it would be rejected ; and 
there was therefore no hazard in voting to give 
them an opportunity of that kind. 

But, sir, we were induced to vote for the House 
amendment for ai ot'ier consideration; and that 
is, that it provided a fair board by wiiich elec- 
tions were to be conducted. We said the pre- 
vious elections ia Kansas had been controlled 



by violence, and corruption, and fraud, but here 
was a ch.nnce to have them safely and honestly 
conducted; and so much security was felt in the 
board provided by the House amendment, that 
we were even willing to say, that when that 
board had supervised the election, appointed the 
officers, received the returns, and adjudicated 
upon those returns, the whole subject might be 
settled by the proclamation of the President, and 
we were led to the latter merely from confidence 
in the former provision. 

But another consideration, and perhaps the 
most important of them all, was that the House 
amendment proposed a course of proceeding 
which would put an end to this controversy in 
either event and at all events. If the people of 
Kansas received and accepted the Lecompton 
Constitution by the vote of a majority, they were 
to lie received ; and if they did not, they were 
to call a new Convention and form such a Con- 
stitution as they pleased, and when that Consti- 
tution was ratified they were to be admitted. 
There was to be the end of the controversy. It 
was because the House amendment did end the 
controversy that it commended itself to the ac- 
ceptance of those who voted for it on this side 
of the Chamber. 

Now, Mr. President, I come to the next step : 
the proposition which is ofl'ered as a substitute 
for both those bills — the proposition of the com- 
mittee of conference. I do not propose to go 
into its details ; but let us see whether it gives 
to those of us who voted against enforcing the 
Lecompton Constitution upon the people without 
their consent, and who voted for the proposition 
of the House of Representatives, those leading 
features of security, and those objects which we 
desired to attain, which were given to us in the 
latter proposition. I will state its leading pro- 
visions. The first is, that the Lecompton Con- 
stitution shall be presented to the people of Kan- 
sas for their acceptance or rejection. " Oh, no," 
says the honorable Senator from Virginia, [Mr. 
HuNTEK,] " it does not submit the Constitution 
to the people." The majority of the Senate, by 
the bill they have passed, decided that it was a 
Constitution perfect, so far as Kansas was con- 
cerned, not to be passed upon any further by the 
people ; and he says this bill so treats it. If I 
understand it, it does not so treat it. It submits 
a certain question to the people; that is, whether 
they will accept those land grants ; and it pro- 
vides that, if they accept those land grants, then, 
and in that case, Lecompton shall stand as the 
Constitution ; but it further provides, that if 
they reject that proposition in regard to the land 
grants, they reject the Lecompton Constitution. 
Now, I ask, is it true, as the Senator from Vir- 
ginia says, that that is consistent with any for- 
mer action of the Senate? Does it not^ubmit 
a question to the people by which they may re- 
ject the Lecompton Constitution ? Certainly it 
does. Did not the Senate say, in the former 
bill, to those people, " it is all perfected on your 
side, and you shall have no opportunity to reject 
Lecompton?" Yes, they did, unconditionally ; 
and I say they now propose a question to the 
people by which the people may reject Lecomp- 



ton ; and yet you say that you do not subject the 
Lec-oinjnou Coiistiliitioii to tlii-ir volet The two 
are utterly iiiconsistfiit ; ami there is no ingenu- 
ity or sophistry, though the peutleman may have 
much of the former, if not of the latter, which 
can by possibility disguise or blink this out of 
sipht. 

UiU, sir, as I said, this proposition provides for 
subniiltinjjf to tlie people of Kansas a question in 
relation to land grants — whetlier they will ac- 
cept a certain, proposition in relation to lands. 
It further provides that, if they will not accept 
that, then, and in that case, Lecompton goes 
aside, and the people of Kansas are to remain in 
thtir Territorial condition for a length of time 
entirely indefinite. It says they may haveaCon- 
vention when they have a sullicient number of 
people to entitle them to a Representative in 
Congress. That number is now ninety-four 
thousand; but, after the next census, in 1800, 
it may be one hundred and twenty or one hun- 
dred and fifty thousand ; we know not. When 
that time will arrive, we know not. Then, the 
amount of it is, that it is an indefinite delay ; it 
shall f)e indefinitely deferred. 

Hesides, it is as much as saying to them, '■ we 
make you this offer of land, but if you will not 
take this offer of land, liberal as it is, now, see 
the danger you run of never getting it." Again, 
this same hill provides that a different board 
shall be created to direct and su[)t'rvise the elec- 
tion. It proposes to add a mem tier, the District 
Attorney, appointed by the President, to the Gov- 
ernor and 8eiretary, so that they shall have 
three — a controlling majority of that board over 
the preMiiing officers of the two Hoiises of the 
Legislature. We view this as entirely unfair. 

The first objection that occurs to my mind is 
the form in which this question is attempted to 
be presented to the people of Kansas. Tiiis has 
been very well defined by the lionorable Senator 
from Kentucky, [Mr. Crittexdkn.] It is to put 
to them one question, by the answer to whi.'h 
they are to decide another question that has no 
relationship to it. You might as well put the 
question to that people, " will you vote that 
you will be freemen?" and now we say to you, 
" if you vote that you will be freemen, yon 
shall have the Topeka Constitution ; but if you 
vote that you will not be freemen, then you shall 
remain in a Territorial condition." There is no 
more relationship itetween the acceptance of this 
grant of laud and the character of this Constitu- 
tion, than there would be between the question 
proposed and the result that was to follow in 
the case I have just put. There is no necessary 
legal sequence or connection between the two 
questions. The proposition is therefore artificial, 
deceptive in its conse()uences. You put to a man 
the question, "Sir, will you take such grants of 
land ; as a citizen of Kansas, are you willing to 
receive «uch grants ? " " Yes," says he, " 1 am." 
"Well, will you vo'e so?" "I do not see why 
I should not vote so." " Well, we tell you now, 
if you will vote to accept these grants, you shall 
take the Lecompton (Jonstitution that you have 
rejected." In sliort, " if you will not vote againfct 
a favorable otfer, you shall Lave imposed upon I 



you a Constitution to which you are opposed, 
ami you must vote against a favorable offer in 
order to get rid of an obnoxious Constitution. 
You must vote against what you desire, in order 
that you may get rid of a greater evil. If you 
vote for these grants which are acceptable to 
you, and liberal in their character, you do it at 
the peril of taking upon you a Constitution that 
3'ou detest." It is the very manner in which the 
(juestiou is |iut to the people which is oltjection- 
able. It is artificial in its character; it is calcu- 
lated to mislead. 

We have com[dained a great deal that the 
Lecompton Constitution was submitted to the 
people in regard to the (jucstion of ijlavery, in a 
certain manner, which was unfair, deceptive, 
and dealing in duplicity. That submission^was 
this: "You may vote for the Constitution with 
Slavery, or for the Constitution without Slavery ; 
but you have to vote for the Constitution, at any 
rate, which has Slavery in it in either case." 
N'ow, how is it here? We put to you the ques- 
tion, "Will you vote for these land grants? But 
now remember, if you vote for the land grants 
you are to have this slave Constitution, and if 
you vote against the, land grants you are to 
have Slavery in your I'erritory without a Con- 
stitution." That is, you are to have a Constitu- 
tion with Slavery, or Slavery without a Consti- 
tution, but Slavery at any rate. Th«t seems to 
me to be the way in which the question i? put 
to them ; because you hold that, under the Dred 
dcott decision, it is a slaveholding Teiritory, 
and therefore, if the people vote for these land 
grants they are to take a slaveholding State 
Constitution, and if they vote against them, tin y 
are to endure Slavery under a Territorial for.a of 
government. That is the alternative. 

The next objection I have to the mariner in 
which this new bill presents the question is to 
ihe provision in regard to population. It seemed 
to be agreed on all hands, and it was provided 
in the bill passed by the Senate, that the num- 
bers of the people of Kansas were sufficient to 
justify their admission. They bad numbers 
enough to admit them two years ago, if they 
woiiM make a Constitution to suit you. You 
thought they had numbers enough to admit them 
under the Lecompton Constitution. There are 
numbers enough of them now to justify their 
admission as a State, if they vote for this Con- 
stitution ; but you give them to understand that 
there are not numbers enough, if they vote 
against this Constitution, to make a free one. 
We have here a proposition that Kansas shall be 
admitted if she will have a slave Constitution, 
and shall not be admitted if she will not have a 
slave Constitution. There are people enough to 
hold slaves, but not -people enough to enjoy P>ee- 
dom ! This, it seems to us, is a palpable injus- 
tice — an entirely different affair from the ilouse 
amendment. 

In the ne.xt place, the proposition which is now 
before us produces no finality; it makes no set- 
tlement. It only makes a settlement provided 
they adopt the Lecompton Constitution, by voting 
in favor of these giants of land. That will make 
a finality; and that is the only finality under this 



proposition — a finality in one resnlt. If the peo- 
ple do not vote to accept these grants, it provides 
for no finality, no settlemeDt, but leaves things 
in statu quo by declaring that the })eople of Kan- 
sas shall remain under a Territorial (orm of gov- 
ernment for an indefinite and unlimited period of 
time. I do not know that that part of tlie prop- 
osition will really have much practical elfect. It 
seems to me to be rather brutuvi fulmen, because 
I suppose Congress can at any time admit them, 
notwithstanding this declaration; but, after all, 
that is the effect it is intended to have on the 
minds of the people of Kansas. It is intended 
if tills bill passes, that they shall understand thai, 
if they do not accept this proposition, this shall 
be a bar to their coming in until they have a cer- 
tain population. 

Another objection, and one to which I have 
alluded before, is that we are not content with 
thii newly-constituted board to supervise the 
elections; we are not willing to take results pro- 
duced under such supervision, so as to say that 
the President, upon the returns being made to 
him, shall issue his proclamation, and Kansas 
become a State, without those returns being 
submitted to our examination. If a board were 
constituted in the manner provided in the House 
amendment, we had so much confidence in that 
manner of constitu'ing the board that we were 
willing to pass it ; but we are not willing to have 
a board constituted in the manner provided in 
this bill, and trust in the result. The history 
of affairs in Kansas is such as leads us to be 
cautious on that subject. We all cannot but 
know, at any rate a large portion of us are con- 
vinced, that the elections in Kansas have been, 
either by violence at the polls, or by fraud and 
false returns afterwards, so conducted that a 
small minority of the people have been kept in 
power. I need not go over the evidences of this. 
The history of the transaction is full of them at 
every step. 

There is another thing that we cannot but re- 
iBember. Whatever officers, especially leading 
officers, who have been appointed in that Terri- 
tory by the Executive of this Governmi nt, the 
President of the United States, have favored any 
degree of fairness to the majority of that people, 
have desired to secure them at all against the 
influence of violence and fraud, have incurred 
the Executive displeasure. This remark will ap- 
ply, 1 think, to all the Government officers there 
who have evinced any fairness, whether we refer 
to Governor Reeder, Governor Geary, acting Sec- 
retary Stanton, or Governor Waiker. In all 
cases where there has been manifested a disposi- 
tion to do fairness, and to get rid of frauds, the 
officers who have manifested such a disposition 
have certainly incurred Executive displeasure 
and its consequences ; and therefore we suppose; 
that whatever offiaers are appointed by the Ex- 
ecutive will read the history of their own fate 
in that of those who have preceded them, and 
will consult their own security in what they are 
doing. We believe we cannot find any safety in 
this proposition, when the majority of the super- 
vising board who have charge of the elections is 
given into the control of officers created by the 



Government of the United States ; superseding 
and overriding the officers appointed by the peo- 
ple of Kansas. This is a feature which we re- 
gard as of vital importance, and to wliich we 
cannot consent. When I say that, 1 speak for 
myself, and not by authority from any of my 
associates, any further than I derive it from the 
action which I have already witnessed at their 
hands. I have no direct authority to speak for 
them. 

Now, sir, the whole of this proposition amounts 
to this : it is saying to the people of Kansas, you 
may vote for the Lecomplon Constitution, but if 
you do not have that, you shall have nothing. 
We are calling upon the people of Kansas to act 
on the great question of forming their Constitu- 
tion — of forming, ratifying, or putting in opera- 
tion, if you please, by their votes, the Constitu- 
tion of their proposed State Government It is 
fundamental, it is the first great principle of self- 
government. Now, you call upon that people to 
act on that subject, and do }ou secure to them 
even what was promised in the Cincinnati plat- 
form? Its pledge was, that in forming a State 
Constitution the people should be left perfectly 
free to mould their institutions in their own way. 
Now, the people of Kansas are called upon to 
take action about the adoption of a Constitution, 
to pass a vote wliich shall put that Constitution 
in force, or reject it; and are they left free? 
They are trammelled up to that one single act, 
whether they will have the Lecompton Constitu- 
tion or have nothing. They are not left free to 
form any Constitution they want, to shape any 
Constitution as they may desire it to be, in rela- 
tion to any of their institutions. In short, the 
vote seems to be very much like the case of Na- 
poleon III, who allowpd the people of France to 
vote, not whether you will have an Emperor, 
not who will you have as Emperor, but will you 
have me for Emperor? That is all. 

Mr. President, I wish now to say a few words 
in regard to the views presented by the honor- 
able Senator from Virginia. He says this bill is 
in exact consistency with that which the Senate 
before passed. I have shown in one respect 
wherein it differs; but that is not all. What 
was the trouble with that bill? He says that 
bill merely declared, in relation to the ordinance, 
that we did not ratify it; that we disclaimed it, 
and did not provide for the state of things that 
would result if the people of Kansas should not 
agree to this condition on which they were to be 
admitted; and, therefore, this bill goes on to 
provide for that contingency. Well, sir, if the 
bill which the Senate passed was obnoxious to 
that difficulty, why on earth did they pass it at 
all ? If it was an objection that you ought to 
make provision for the contingency of the people 
in a Convention, or by their own votes, refusing 
to ratify the amended ordinance which you sub- 
mitted to them, then why did you go on to pass 
a bill by which you admitted them on condition 
that thej'^ should not have the ordinance which 
the Convention had made? The Senator from 
Virginia says the difficulty is in regard to the 
ordinance proposing the terms on which the 
StUrte shall agree to forego the right of taxing 



the public lands, if it has that right, and the 
grants in consideration of which it will yield 
that rif<ht. He says that ia a matter on which 
the State should [)ass, as a j>eo])le, hy themselves, 
or by their delegates; and that, until they do thai, 
you cannot admit them as a State, unless they 
have themselves delegated that power to iheir 
own Convention. Then, I ask, how came the 
Senate to pass the original bill, by which they 
jumped over all objections of that kind? I say 
this is a dilFereot thing, and inconsisteit wilii 
that bill in that respect. But the truih is, all 
that amounted to nothing, for the ordinance is 
no part of the Constitution. Thty claim certain 
grants cf land. If we receive them under their 
Constitution, without dischiiming the ordinance, 
we make the grants ; but the bill passed by the 
Senate provided that they should be admitted 
on condition that the ordinance should be of no 
effect, and further provided that nothing con- 
tained in the bill should exclude tnem from 
claiming >vhat had been granted to .Minnesota, 
(which is what is now offered, ) or prevent Con- 
gress from making grants whenever it chose. 
Was not that left right? I see no objection to 
that part of the bill ; there never wis any objec- 
tion made to that on this side of the Chamber, 1 
believe. Neither the people there nor anywhere 
else made any objection to it on that ground. 
No, sir, this is a mere device. There has never 
been any issue of that kind made in any quarter, 
by any man, or by any paper in Kansas, here, or 
elsewhere. It is altogeher an after-thought, a 
device cooked up for this occasion. 

The honorable Senator from Virginia claims 
that this very proposition does that which would 
settle this controversy, as he thinks. Well, then, 
he must think they are going to adopt the Le- 
compton Constitution, 1 suppose; but he hardly 
intimates that. He hardly believes they will do 
that. What then? It will leave Kansas in a 
Territorial comlition, and then, he says, we shall 
have a guaranty of peace for tliree, four, five, or 
six years. Wherein is that guaranty of peace? 
May not, and will not, the same controversy con- 
tinue in Kansas as heretofore ? Shall we have 
taken any step to cure it? Not at all. Will 
they not continue to call Conventions, and ask 
for admission into the Union when they please ? 
Certainly; but oh, it is said, we have provided 
here that they shall not be admitted until they 
Jbave the proper number. That, however, does 
not prevent Congress from admitting them, nor 
prevent them from asking for admission. Every 
bone of contention, every apple of discord, every 
point of dirticulty which has ever agitated Kan- 
sas or the country on this subject, remains, and 
will remain until they are admitted as a State. 
It is vain to suppose that we are going to local- 
ize the quarrel now, any more thitn we have suc- 
ceeded in doing so heretofore. The people of 
this Union, in all parts of it, particularly in the 
North and South, have taken too deep an interest 
in the question involved, to permit it to go on 
without their participatin(j in it, in interest at least. 
They will i)artake in it. Hence, this proposed bill 
will leave, and it does leave, at any rate in one re- 
sult, all the ditHculties opea to perpetual ugitulion. 



Mr. President, disguise this matter as we may, 
there is oue fact of which, 1 think, we must be 
morally convinced, thai the Lecompton Consti- 
tution is abhorrent to the views and feelings and 
opinions of a large mnjority of the people of Kan- 
sas. I doubt whether a man can be found wl)o 
will tjnestion that fact. The very message which 
tlie President of the United States has sent to us 
on the sul'jert, imports that. lie says that the 
peojile of Kansas were so strangely attached to 
the Topeka Con.<tiiuiion that it was of no use to 
submit to them any other, for they would reject 
it; and it was not submitted to the [teople because 
it would be rejected. So it is in relation to the 
action of the delegates to the Convention who 
had promised to submit the Constitution to the 
people, and did not do so. After all, why was it 
that they did not submit it to the people? Can 
any man present any other possible reason, than 
because they knew the Constitution would be 
rejected? The vote which was taken on the 4th 
ot January, even if you count on the other side 
all the votes given on the 2l3t of December, 
leaves no possible doubt about it. I suppose 
that all the people in Kansas who desired to have 
the Lecompton Constitution, voted for it, either 
vvith or without Slavery, on the 21st of December. 
8i.\ thousand votes were returned as having been 
cast on that occasion. 1 do not think more than 
half of them were really crtst, but call it six 
thousand. I suppose that about all the people 
of Kansas who desired to reject that Constitu- 
tion altogether, voted against it on the 4th of 
January — more than ten thousand. Under these 
circumstances, can there be any reasonable doubt 
as to the views of the people of Kansas? None 
at all. Viewing it in that light, I consider it alto- 
gether wrong to resort to any contrivances, any 
dtvices, any expe<lients, on the part of Congress, 
to endeavor to get rid of that expression of the 
will of the ppo{)le, and to fix upon them, in any 
way, a Constitution that we know they do not 
desire. 

This proposition is subject to all the exceptions 
I have made to it, and yet more. It propcees to 
submit the question to the people ot Kansas at 
such a time, in such a form, nnd under stich pe- 
culiar circumstances, that we must see that it is 
intended, at least it is well calculated and inge- 
niously devised, to secure, if possible, the snc- 
cess of the Lecompton Constitution, whether the 
people really desire it or not. Among the other 
means which may be counted upon for possible 
success in this vole is the improbability of getting 
the people to vote against a proposition for lands, 
which proposition they like, Ijecause a Constitu- 
tion may loUow. Is it not tiperating as a bli^id 
on the jnople? " Here is a fair and liberal prop- 
osition o) land to you : do you not like it? " Every 
man may say, "I like it." Then conies the ques- 
tion, " Will you vote for it?" ''No; 1 will not 
vote for it, because I will have to take such a Con- 
stitution with it." Is it to be expected that every 
man in Kansas will understand that? Is not the 
very manner in ^vhich the question is presented 
10 him '-ah ulated to disguise the real question, 
and to delude him? 

Again, we know that that people have been 



harassed and dragooned, and continued under 
all sorts of violent oppressions which the forms 
of law would allow, for many years in succes- 
sion. I need not go over the story of the vio- 
lence and the wrongs which they have suffered ; 
but they liave suffered, and that long and se- 
Terely. They very much need repose. Now, you 
propose to them that they may have repose. 
How? If they will take Slavery. Otherwise 
they are to have no rei)0se, no securitj', but are 
to be subjected to a still longer continuance of 
their sufferings, and to endure longer t'-ibula- 
tion. 

In the next place, it may be counted that they 
■will vote for it, Viecause all those who desire the 
places of Senators and Representatives and Gov- 
ernors-and Secretaries and Treasurers and other 
offices, all those who hope for and have some 
reasonable expectation of succeeding in obtain- 
ing some of tiiese offices, desire to get Kansas in 
a State form as soon as possible. You will have 
all that weight to obtain a particular slavehold- 
ing OonstitiKioi), though it is not the Constitu- 
tion the people desire. Besides, you have the 
assistance of the Territorial officers appointed by 
the Executive. They well know what the ruling 
mijority here desire to effect. They know that 
they desire to effect the adoption of the Lecoinp- 
ton Constitution. That is perfectly understood 
by the Governor, the Secretary, the Marshal, the 
District Attorney, the land officers, and all the 
other officers of this Government in the Territory 
of Kansas. All their aid is to be counted upon. 
That would not be so, if it were submitted to the 
people to make such a Constitution as they de- 
sired. That would be an entirely different effect, 
and then the action and influence of these offi- 
cers might be entirely neutralized. 

Further, instead of saying to the people of 
Kansas, "you may settle this question by form- 
ing such a Constitution as you want," this prop- 
osition gives them no such opportunity. It is so 
framed as to present to the world this view : " The 
majority in Congress have always desired to have 
this matter settled, but the Kansas people want 
to keep it up, and the Abolitionists try to make 
them keep it up. Now, we have offered to let 
them make a State Constitution if they please ; 
that is, to take the Lecompton Constitution ; but 
they have coolly rejected it." This being done, 
ii may be argued, " Can we not say to the whole 
wo'Id, do you not see that it is the Kansas peo- 
ple that try to keep the question open? they 
would not adopt the Constitution we offered 
thein;" and they must incur displeasure and 
prejudice for trying to keep the question open, 
when you have given them no opportunity fairly 
to close it. 

There is ano'.her consideration to which this 
proposition addresses itself, calculated to give it 
success. The people of Kansas have been told 
by the Executive of the United States, that if 
they would only get to be a State, especially if 
they would get to be a slave State, it would be 
the shortest and quickest road to obtain a free 
State, because they have the right any day to 
alter the Constitution, and can do it immediate- 
ly. The Preeident told them so. The report of 



the Committee on Territories, who presented the 
bill passed by the Senate, substantially endorsed 
the same doctrine ; and gentlemen here say it is 
contained in the Lecompton Constitution, al- 
though that Constitution provides for one mode 
of amendment, which mode is, that it may be 
amended after 1864, by a two-thirds majority in 
both Houses of the Legislature, and then sub- 
mitting the amendment to the people — an im- 
practicable mode. 

Now, the people of Kansas are to be presented 
with this question, in the form of which I have 
spoken, under this sort of assurance. I have no 
doubt that it is expected, certainly it is very well 
calculated, to induce that people to vote for the 
Constitution; and, indeed, in a recently-pub- 
lished letter of Governor Robinson, he says, that 
if there was no doubt as to how the certificates 
would be given to the officers chosen at the elec- 
tion which has already taken place, he thinks it 
would be well even to have the Lecompton Con- 
stitution put on them, because they would have 
the controlling power; and he says that people 
are fiitigued with their long political agitation, 
and in need of rest, and desirous of going about 
their industrial pursuits. Is not this whole prop- 
osition well calculated to secure a vote of that 
long-oppressed people, desirous of peace, even 
for what they do not want? The truth is, it ad- 
dresses them on motives of that kind. If they 
follow it, they will certainly be deluded. Just 
so sure as the Lecompton Constitution is put into 
effect and operation, it will not be altered and 
amended. If they attempt to amend it immedi- 
ately upon its being put into operation by the 
action of the newly-elecied Legislature, the Gov- 
ernor would veto the act. The Free-State peo- 
ple have not got two-thirds of the Legislature, 
and they are not to have it anyhow. The at- 
tempt to amend the Constitution will be stopped ; 
but if it were to go on, whenever that resolves 
itself into a judicial question, as it may at any 
time, and is presented to the Supreme Court of the 
United States, it will no doubt be decided that the 
people cannot alter their Constitution contrary 
to the provisions of that Constitution. It will 
be held that it is a sort of national compact by 
which people have come into the government of 
the majority on that condition ; and being thus in 
the nature of a compact, it is incapable of being 
changed, except agreeably to the terms of the 
comjiact itself. They will be deluded in that; 
and I suppose, indeed I know, that this is well 
calculated to delude them. Whether it will do 
so effectually, time must determine. 

I have very little hesitation in saying that, 
whatever may take place, if this question of ac- 
cepting the land grants is presented to the peoi- 
ple under this bill, rely upon it, Mr. President — 
I speak merely from the lessons which the his- 
tory of Kansas has taught me — a majority will 
be returned in favor of accepting the land grants. 
I say that a majority will be returned for it, in 
all human probability, whatever the actual votes 
may be. 1 do not agree with the honorable Sen- 
ator from Kentucky, that the result will be other- 
wise, and that the proposition will be rejected. I 
do not say that I do not believe a majority of the 



people will vote agrainst it ; but I say the returns ; 
will show a mnjority the other wiiy ; iind when 
I ?rtj ihdt, I speak merely from the lesEons taught | 
me by ihe hislury of Kansas itself 

There is another matter that equally bears on 
this proposition, and addresses itself to us on this 
occasion. An election has been held under the 
Lecomptou Constitution ; and if the people accept 
these land grants with this tondiiion, of course, 
then, I take it, they are to abide by that election. 
Now, can anybody tell me what is the result of 
that election? Does not the final and ultimate 
determination of it rest with a certain Mr. Cal- 
houn to-day ? Is it not. altogether within his 
hands and under his control? Most unquestion- 
ably it is. If the ptople do as they may do under 
this proposition, and as it is calculated to have 
them do — accej)t the Lecompton Constitution 
under the belief that the certificates of election 
are to be actually issued to a majority of the 
representatives of the Free-State people, they will 
certainly be deluded. 

I have attempted to show that all these motives 
and purposed are presented, by the arrangement 
of this bill, calculated, not to carry into effect the 
true wishes of the people of Kansas, but to frus- 
trate and evade them, and obtain, in point of fact, 
from these motives and considerations, a vote of 
that people, by which they shall take upon them- 
selves this slave Constitution, abhorrent to their 
feelings. 

Mr. President, I do not wish to detain the Sen- 
ate longer. I have stated the reasons why, in my 
view, we cannot vote for this bill thai is now pre- 



sented here, whenever it shall come up properly, 
proposed by the committee of conference. It is 
utterly inconsistent with all the views we have 
entertained, and utterly inconsistent with the 
vot^s we have given in relation to the House 
amendment. I do not know but that, if it be 
presented to them, the people of Kansas will 
manifest a continuance of the virtue and endu- 
rance they have heretofore displayed, by which 
they will disregard all the motives and induce- 
ments here held out to them, hold on their way, 
and go on enduring even unto the end, rejecting 
this proposition. It is possible that such may be 
the result of their discernment and their virtue ; 
but I think we have little reason to expect that 
such will be the result. Certain I am, that none 
of these gentlemen who contrived this bill, and 
devised the form in which it is presented, e.xpect 
to have any such result. At least a strong hope 
is entertained that it will secure the purposes 
I for which it is designed by these contrivances — 
secure success to the Lecompton Constitution, 
whether the people desire it or not. 

Viewing it in this light, regarding it in this 
view, it seems to me that the thing itself, in its 
character and in all its aspects, is utterly incon- 
sistent with that conduct which becomes an 
American Senate — the Congress of a great peo- 
ple, whose conduct should be distinguished for 
directness, for frankness, for justness, for fairness, 
not for cunning and device. Sir, I think, if we 
intend to secure the confidence and command the 
respect of the people of this great and discern- 
ing nation, lovers of justice as they are, we shall 
reject this proposition. 




PREPARE FOR THE FALL ELECTIONS. 



The National ReptjblicajsT AssociATtoN have completed arrange- 
ments for publishing and distributing Tracts, Essays, and Speeches, 
bearing upon the important question now agitating the country. 

Most of the Speeches delivered in Congress during the present 
session by the Republican members, and also those that may hereafter 
be delivered, can be had, enveloped and free of postage^ at 75 cents per 
100 for eight-page, and $1.25 per 100 for sixteen-page Speeches. 

Our Republican friends ought to take immediate steps to flood every 
Congressional district, and especially districts noAV represented by Admin- 
istration Democrats, with these Speeches and Documents. Heretofore 
this work has been done by the Members of Congress at their own ex- 
pense, but after the adjournment of Congress this responsibility will de- 
volve upon other friends of the cause. 

The ISTational Republican Association at "Washington City stand 
ready to lend all the assistance in their power. 

Send in your orders without delay. Address 

L. CLEPHANE, 
Secretary National Republican Assodatioriy 
Washingtony D. C. 

May 1, 1858. 



